On Apr 5, 2014, at 8:39 AM, YGelmanPhoto wrote:
As a practitioner of the biting insult like the one you just delivered, be careful of what you wish for. I don’t think we need moderation here, but rather acceptance of varying points of view. Your point of view floats around all over the map, and when you get intentionally insulted like Emily delivered with the unjust critique of your title, you don’t take a stand. If I had shot the lace factory, I probably would have titled it the same or perhaps just “Lace factory.” I believe most curators would have looked for a similar title. For images to work best, they need a couple of words for the viewer to connect what might be a grotty interior to a time or a place, or to jog some memory from their past when they perhaps visited a Lowell knitting mill from the heartland of America’s industrial revolution. Images presented alone with no title and no ‘cut line’ are not seen the same. And OK, if an image featuring a Toyota is presented with no description, it is safe to say it is an ad for Toyota. Are you aware that this factory is a historic building and on the National Register? Since you don’t live in Scranton, what made you visit this factory? Was it the TV show? The Wiki article is here, and it is very interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scranton_Lace_Company. If you want to shoot great factories, look up the National Museum of Industrial History in Bethlehem PA, and go see what they have to offer before it gets on TV. Art Faul The Artist Formerly Known as Prints ------ Art for Cars: art4carz.com Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com Camera Works - The Washington Post . |
